VCP got a face lift

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Please don't put words in my mouth . There are a few good guys over there but there are a ton of trolls too.

The guy asking Bobby the question was one of the guys outing the altered cards. You said to Bobby you would not reply to an anonymous troll. So it seemed a fair comment.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The guy asking Bobby the question was one of the guys outing the altered cards. You said to Bobby you would not reply to an anonymous troll. So it seemed a fair comment.

So the mods over there will out Bobby (if he was there) but not one of the trolls saying i sell drugs to kids? Great place. And those guys doing all of the outing could be Peter Nash or worse. How do you know they aren't? I imagine some of the guys are decent guys but without knowing who they are how do you know? I could almost guarantee some are low life criminals, but again, since the mods protect them there is no way to know. Cesspool with a few good guys if you ask me. No thanks. Btw, Did the guy(s) over there accusing Bobby have names next to their ids?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

So the mods over there will out Bobby (if he was there) but not one of the trolls saying i sell drugs to kids? Great place. And those guys doing all of the outing could be Peter Nash or worse. How do you know they aren't? I imagine some of the guys are decent guys but without knowing who they are how do you know? I could almost guarantee some are low life criminals, but again, since the mods protect them there is no way to know. Cesspool with a few good guys if you ask me. No thanks. Btw, Did the guy(s) over there accusing Bobby have names next to their ids?

I am not defending the whole concept of that board, I was only responding to a specific comment you made about one question asked there by one guy. I took your comment to imply that guy was a troll and I disagree.

That said, I fully support your policy of requiring names, as you know. But I've had lots of communications with the people on Blowout doing the outing and I either know who they are or am satisfied that they are acting with integrity. And their work really doesn't depend on who they are, pictures are pictures.

[Leon]

So acting with integrity even if you are a criminal is ok, got it.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I am not defending the whole concept of that board, I was only responding to a specific comment you made about one question asked there by one guy. I took your comment to imply that guy was a troll and I disagree.

That said, I fully support your policy of requiring names, as you know. But I've had lots of communications with the people on Blowout doing the outing and I either know who they are or am satisfied that they are acting with integrity. And their work really doesn't depend on who they are, pictures are pictures.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

So acting with integrity even if you are a criminal is ok, got it.

I am not following you. I don't think any of those guys is Peter Nash.

[Leon]

You said as long as they act with integrity it doesn't matter (I said they could be criminal). I politely disagree. I am not saying what they have done is bad, it's good. But they might not have clean hands themselves and there is no way to know. How do you know for sure that the guys doing the outing aren't fraudsters too? That is just a problem for me and if you don't care, I understand. Again, Moser, PWCC, PSA, me, or anyone committing fraud should be punished, I am not saying they shouldn't.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I am not following you. I don't think any of those guys is Peter Nash.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

You said as long as they act with integrity it doesn't matter (I said they could be criminal). I politely disagree. I am not saying what they have done is bad, it's good. But they might not have clean hands themselves and there is no way to know. How do you know for sure that the guys doing the outing aren't fraudsters too? That is just a problem for me and if you don't care, I understand. Again, Moser, PWCC, PSA, me, or anyone committing fraud should be punished, I am not saying they shouldn't.

They could also be Madonna or Mike Trout. No, I don't know for certain who a couple of them are, but I am relying on my judgment and instincts I guess, formed on the basis of many dealings.

[thenextlevel]

Originally Posted by Leon

Cesspool with a few good guys if you ask me. No thanks

Wow, that’s painting with a broad brush. I didn’t know posting without your name attached classifies one as likely a scumbag.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by thenextlevel

Wow, that’s painting with a broad brush. I didn’t know posting without your name attached classifies one as likely a scumbag.

I didn't say that. I said it is a cesspool. I am more talking about the way that place is moderated. I would guess most over there Are GOOD people. But as I said there are a lot of trolls too. And they get protected. That isn't good in my book but I guess it is yours. We can agree to disagree. BTW what I specifically said is that the troll saying I was selling drugs to kids is protected. If I wanted to pursue it I would sue the venue for that information and go after them in court. But I am not wasting my time I just left over there... I am sure you would be ok with some troll saying that unfounded crap about you, right?

[thenextlevel]

Originally Posted by Leon

I didn't say that. I said it is a cesspool. I am more talking about the way that place is moderated. I would guess most over there Are GOOD people. But as I said there are a lot of trolls too. And they get protected. That isn't good in my book but I guess it is yours. We can agree to disagree. BTW what I specifically said is that the troll saying I was selling drugs to kids is protected. If I wanted to pursue it I would sue the venue for that information and go after them in court. But I am not wasting my time I just left over there... I am sure you would be ok with some troll saying that unfounded crap about you, right?

I’m not speaking for the trolls that you find on any message board, and no, I would not be ok with that degree of slander, but there are a lot of good members there, regardless of their anonymity.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Leon

I didn't say that. I said it is a cesspool. I am more talking about the way that place is moderated. I would guess most over there Are GOOD people. But as I said there are a lot of trolls too. And they get protected. That isn't good in my book but I guess it is yours. We can agree to disagree. BTW what I specifically said is that the troll saying I was selling drugs to kids is protected. If I wanted to pursue it I would sue the venue for that information and go after them in court. But I am not wasting my time I just left over there... I am sure you would be ok with some troll saying that unfounded crap about you, right?

Leon,

I agree that posting names is a good thing. And I always do it, as you know.
I am also good with people outing fraudsters, particularly if, as there has been, before and after pics are posted that are pretty damning. In that specific instance, I am beyond OK with that even if they don't post names. Would I prefer that they did? certainly. But the evidence is rather compelling irrespective of that. If the authorities decide to take action, they will get those identities, I promise.

I am also good with the initial question Peter asked of Bobby. If you go read the thread, it is pretty clear that the CU reveal that was posted on Blowout indicated that Bobby posted under a, shall we say, assumed name, denied that it was him, and got caught based on previous posts where he had actually posted and identified himself under that same assumed name. It was really quite comical IMO.. I don't think there is anything wrong with calling him out for that either, because that was BS. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

[Leon]

Well I agree that outing fraud is good. I just think some of those outing the fraud are probably fraudsters too. I realize you don't have an issue with that (or seem to insinuate that). I do, we can easily agree to disagree. That doesn't mean what they say isn't true.
I was taken to task over there for things I don't/didn't do. And the mods did nothing. And no, I would not answer anonymous posters questions either. IF they want to put their real, verifiable, name next to it I am happy to answer. But it would not be in a venue where those kind of patently false accusations, by anonymous (trolls in my book), don't get reprimanded. Overall, of course I am glad the fraud that was going on was outed and is being dealt with by authorities. I hope whomever is committing fraud in the hobby gets punished to the full extent of the law. It hurts all hobbyists.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Leon,

I agree that posting names is a good thing. And I always do it, as you know.
I am also good with people outing fraudsters, particularly if, as there has been, before and after pics are posted that are pretty damning. In that specific instance, I am beyond OK with that even if they don't post names. Would I prefer that they did? certainly. But the evidence is rather compelling irrespective of that. If the authorities decide to take action, they will get those identities, I promise.

I am also good with the initial question Peter asked of Bobby. If you go read the thread, it is pretty clear that the CU reveal that was posted on Blowout indicated that Bobby posted under a, shall we say, assumed name, denied that it was him, and got caught based on previous posts where he had actually posted and identified himself under that same assumed name. It was really quite comical IMO.. I don't think there is anything wrong with calling him out for that either, because that was BS. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What's your basis for saying those outing the fraud are fraudsters, or some of them?

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Leon

Well I agree that outing fraud is good. I just think some of those outing the fraud are probably fraudsters too. I realize you don't have an issue with that (or seem to insinuate that). I do, we can easily agree to disagree. That doesn't mean what they say isn't true.
I was taken to task over there for things I don't/didn't do. And the mods did nothing. And no, I would not answer anonymous posters questions either. IF they want to put their real, verifiable, name next to it I am happy to answer. But it would not be in a venue where those kind of patently false accusations, by anonymous (trolls in my book), don't get reprimanded. Overall, of course I am glad the fraud that was going on was outed and is being dealt with by authorities. I hope whomever is committing fraud in the hobby gets punished to the full extent of the law. It hurts all hobbyists.

I would certainly have an issue if they were actually committing fraud which was or could be proven, such as PWCC is doing. But I haven't seen any evidence of that. Zero. So at this point, what you think is speculation at best IMO. I can't really go too far on complete speculation. If you do, OK. I don't. If you have that fraudsters evidence that I haven't yet seen, show me what it is and I will look at it and maybe revise my opinion. I don't like fraudsters either. I just don't know why you are saying that.

Nor do I think that any of the accusations we are talking about are patently false. I actually feel that it is otherwise. And, with respect to the initial question Peter asked, Bobby outed himself. If you are dumb enough to do that, you get what you get. He deserves to be flamed. Its pretty easy IMO.